NAGA VARA PRASAD MANDALA,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 599/HYD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 January 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to give the assessee one more opportunity of being heard in the interest of justice. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo verification and assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. Despite multiple opportunities, the assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A). The ITAT noted that the assessee failed to utilize the opportunities provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without proper opportunity of being heard and whether the deposits in bank were correctly treated as unexplained money and deductions were wrongly disallowed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 80C,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VIRTUAL COURT

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HONBLE & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HONBLEShri Shakeer Ahamed

For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed
Pronounced: 30.01.2024

O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM)

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 18.08.2023 for the A.Y.2018-19.

2.

Assessee has raised following grounds in its appeal: - (A.Y. 2018-19) Naga Vara Prasad Mandala “1. The order of the Hon’ble CIT(A) is erroneous in law as well as facts of the case.

2. The Hon’ble CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The Hon’ble CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without giving an proper opportunity of being heard and the order passed without being heard is not valid.

4. The Hon’ble CIT(A) ought to have observed that the Assessing officer has failed to appreciate the detailed submission made during the course of assessment proceedings and has erred in considering the deposits in bank as unexplained money u/s.69A of IT Act and the disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80C is invalid.

5. The Hon’ble CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer has wrongly assessed the amount of Cash of Rs. 13,61,000/- as unexplained money and taxed u/s. 115BBE which is not sustainable and the same need to be deleted.

6. Any other ground will be raised at the time of hearing.”

3.

At the outset, we observe that inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was sought. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of this appeal with the assistance of Ld.DR and the material available on record.

4.

Ld.DR brought to our notice relevant facts of the case and he relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and submitted that assessee has not utilized the opportunity provided by Assessing Officer as well as Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is exparte order.

5.

Considered the submissions of Ld. DR and material placed on record. On a perusal of the assessment order and Ld.CIT(A) order, we

Page No. 2

(A.Y. 2018-19) Naga Vara Prasad Mandala find that even though the Assessing Officer and Ld.CIT(A) provided opportunity on several occasions, assessee could not appear nor complied to the notices issued. Considering the totality of facts and keeping in view the additions / disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, we are of the opinion that assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, in the interest of justice we are of the view that this matter should go back to the file of the Assessing Officer for denovo verification and assessment. Assessee shall cooperate with the proceedings before the Assessing Officer without taking unnecessary adjournments. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, this appeal is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer accordingly.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →